| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Cheerio
Ukraine3178 Posts
On April 19 2011 20:34 Severedevil wrote: Don't try to balance the stages. That's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth. There are no stages. stages of the game is an accepted fact, accepted by Blizzard, community, pros. Why dont you elaborate your point? | ||
|
413X
Sweden203 Posts
 http://www.speedyshare.com/files/28046112/KeXrepondZvP.wma Plz comment, am I really that wrong? XD | ||
|
DarKcS
Australia1237 Posts
I swear I took out 4k mins with only 1k banes, checking the units lost tab it was masssive, usually Zergs trading armies always end up a little behind, but I was way ahead. (can provide replay). I only lost when I started trying to make roaches, I realised that I would simply never match the Toss's ball cost effectively with roaches, and I died with an inferior force as his last attack came, despite coming out ahead in the last few engagements, so I lost that game, but I learned a lot from it. | ||
|
Polatrite
United States135 Posts
On April 19 2011 06:34 M1cha84 wrote: The OP made many good points here, but from a Zerg perspective I have to say this: As Zerg being the macro race, the main goal for the other races should be to harass the Zerg, so he cant macro up and kill you with the overwhelming meat ball. Terran for example has reapers/had reapers, Hellions, Banshees and Drops, etc. Protoss has Cannon rushes, void rays, phonix, DTs, etc. When the Zerg manages to defend all of this, he is in a good position against Terran. The game is nearly balanced in the late game in ZvT, in my opinion. Against Protoss, fighting against a 200/200 army is in most cases an auto loss. And here is the design flaw! Zerg should be by definition mightier in late game than the other races, thats why P and T have soo many possibilities to harrass Zerg in early and mid game! There are two major flaws in your post: 1) Zerg is not the macro race. That is a made up term that players have applied to the earlier Zerg playstyle. The only reason Zerg is considered "macro" is because they expand relatively for free - you need additional Hatcheries to produce the same amount of units as other strong 1-base Terran and Protoss builds - so why not put your hatchery down at your expansion? Might as well! 2) Even in Brood War, races were very different late-game. Not every race is going to be supreme at 200/200 flat out army ball vs. army ball combat. That's why Brood War does NOT feature army ball vs. army ball combat! In Brood War harassment and multi-pronged attacks were key. We will probably eventually see similar techniques so that these inevitable racial imbalances (e.g. Protoss winning all 200/200 fights with equivalent micro and proper composition) don't shine through. | ||
|
partysnatcher
156 Posts
On April 19 2011 22:27 Polatrite wrote: There are two major flaws in your post: 1) Zerg is not the macro race. That is a made up term that players have applied to the earlier Zerg playstyle. The only reason Zerg is considered "macro" is because they expand relatively for free - you need additional Hatcheries to produce the same amount of units as other strong 1-base Terran and Protoss builds - so why not put your hatchery down at your expansion? Might as well! 2) Even in Brood War, races were very different late-game. Not every race is going to be supreme at 200/200 flat out army ball vs. army ball combat. That's why Brood War does NOT feature army ball vs. army ball combat! In Brood War harassment and multi-pronged attacks were key. We will probably eventually see similar techniques so that these inevitable racial imbalances (e.g. Protoss winning all 200/200 fights with equivalent micro and proper composition) don't shine through. 1) Agreed completely. For 2) to eventually end up in a good way, Zerg needs more initiative and options. Zergs need to be able to take risks, and be able win even with a weak "hand". Like you say, multi-fronting, surprises and harassment is what balances the game, together with feints and similar. Right now, this part of the game is heavily underpowered for Zerg. | ||
|
osten
Sweden316 Posts
I should think protoss would want to leave their base before 200, in the future metagame. Otherwise blizzard has to do something because this is really wierd, when you take 5 bases and he just gets 200 pop on two, and only that fact makes you lose, it dosen't feel quite right. | ||
|
Benjerry
Sweden9 Posts
On April 19 2011 08:15 TrickyGilligan wrote: This is one of the stupider things I have read on TL. In a game of skill, if one player makes zero mistakes, they should win 100%. No mistakes means playing perfectly, and if you can play perfectly and still lose, that's when the game is broken. The reasonable way of reading what you quoted is of course to take it to imply that *both* players make no mistakes. Because then it makes perfect sense, and is congruent with the overall point made in the post. But it´s easier to assume the silly interpretation (I.e. "100% perfect Protoss vs. Flawed Zerg") while calling the post "stupid", I guess... | ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On April 19 2011 06:17 Incognoto wrote: I believe Fungal Growth has a range of 9 which is the same as Thermal Lance Colossi. I was surprised to learn that Fungals had that much range actually. Recently I'm starting to wonder if Infestor/Baneling wouldn't do well against the deathball. The problem is that to survive up until that point is really difficult as Zerg, Infestor/baneling is really gas heavy. I'm not even sure if it's that effective. Especially with forcefields. It's really hard to say. ;s Banelings and infestors work great against the deathball, they can completely obliterate it, I have been trying to say this for a few days now. I've also been using it as my staple ZvP build on the ladder. Forcefields aren't too much of an issue, as long as you have good creep spread you can easily use the speed of a ling/bling/infestor army to force them to use up their energy in the middle of the map, and the baneling ball is so potent that they literally have to surround their entire army with FF (if you catch them in the open, some maps won't allow this, but it's still manageable) so the energy does not last long. By the time you get ultras out they become irrelevant, but then hallucinate can potentially be a big problem but at least in that situation you only have to find a way to kill the sentries once and then toss will never have enough to be effective with it. Fungal is good for splashing damage (means less banes have to kill themselves) and locking everything down to prevent the potential gosu toss from splitting his army. Like you said the problem is getting up to that point, surviving a 6 gate or 5 gate robo timing is difficult but I believe it can be reliably done with the right timing. That is if he stops attacking after the first attempt. The real bitch is if he forces you to trade armies during that mid-game timing. Banelings are flat out inefficient and more so the more stalkers toss has, I don't think it is possible to keep up. In a maxed situation the inefficiency doesn't matter because after you kill the deathball once it takes so long to rebuild, but in the mid game the gateway units will reinforce much faster than the larva and baneling morph can keep up with. I think some form of a tech switch is needed to deal with this, perhaps going ling/bling/infestor to deal with the potential deathball, and then if he hits with a mid game timing obliterate the first push with the banes and then reinforce with roach/ling or roach/hydra to fight the now smaller toss army efficiently. Is this affordable or feasible? I don't know yet. | ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On April 19 2011 23:08 osten wrote: I'd say the fungal was pretty helpful, especially when they get void, but all in all I am pretty sure spines and nydus can do what we are looking for and in fact, are tailored for this exact scenario. I should think protoss would want to leave their base before 200, in the future metagame. Otherwise blizzard has to do something because this is really wierd, when you take 5 bases and he just gets 200 pop on two, and only that fact makes you lose, it dosen't feel quite right. As I said in my post above, ling/bling/infestor does in fact force him to want to leave his base, if he tries to turtle to 200 it will be a free win, but when he leaves his base that creates more problems that need to be (and can be) solved. | ||
|
SweetenemY
Germany136 Posts
On April 19 2011 20:43 Cheerio wrote: well arguing the point that zerg players are kind of stupid is not a step in the right direction As i said: i am not a good player. So i dont dare saying Zergplayers are stupid, i just want to understand, why they dont use their ability to switch their unit-composition/tech within seconds, in order to break a protoss army, that is lacking some kind of tech (templar), or lacking (enough) unit-producing structures to react accordingly in time(3+ stargates/robos). Why dont they kill mainly the collosi in the first engagement and then, when the Protoss reinforces only stalker to go funking kill the Zerg, switch their army-composition, that is able to kill the stalker ball. No offense anywhere, just the same i have written before, so thanks for grabbing a line of my post, just to blame me have the wrong tone ... | ||
|
Dragar
United Kingdom971 Posts
On April 20 2011 00:12 SweetenemY wrote: As i said: i am not a good player. So i dont dare saying Zergplayers are stupid, i just want to understand, why they dont use their ability to switch their unit-composition/tech within seconds, in order to break a protoss army, that is lacking some kind of tech (templar), or lacking (enough) unit-producing structures to react accordingly (3+ stargates/robos). Why dont they kill mainly the collosi in their first engagement and then, when the Protoss reinforces only stalker to go funking kill the Zerg, switch their army-composition, that is able to kill the stalker ball. No offense anywhere, just the same i have written before, so thanks for grabbing 2 lines of a my post, just to blame me have the wrong tone ... Switch to what? To mass unupgraded lings and blings? Mass unupgraded mutalisks against blink stalkers? Pure hydras? None of these are actually any good against huge stalker blobs with one or two reinforcing robo or twlilight units. | ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On April 20 2011 00:12 SweetenemY wrote: As i said: i am not a good player. So i dont dare saying Zergplayers are stupid, i just want to understand, why they dont use their ability to switch their unit-composition/tech within seconds, in order to break a protoss army, that is lacking some kind of tech (templar), or lacking (enough) unit-producing structures to react accordingly (3+ stargates/robos). Why dont they kill mainly the collosi in their first engagement and then, when the Protoss reinforces only stalker to go funking kill the Zerg, switch their army-composition, that is able to kill the stalker ball. No offense anywhere, just the same i have written before, so thanks for grabbing 2 lines of a my post, just to blame me have the wrong tone ... The problem is zerg going roach/hydra/corrupter, it is so inefficient that zerg might only kill 20 supply worth of units while losing the entire 130 food army, when you are in that situation you simply cannot reinforce in time to deal with it, regardless of what units you are trying to use - on top of that if toss macros up a good 3 base economy, gateway units aren't exactly slow to reinforce with either. The mindset of just throw units at him and win the reinforcement battle is part of the problem, IMO. It only works in mid-game with a mondragon style play. Back when roach/hydra/corrupter worked, zergs knew they needed to to start the army trade *before* the toss hit 200 for it to be effective, incontrol even says this in a early episode with mrbitters. Then toss learned to keep his army safe at all costs and we are in this situation now. | ||
|
SweetenemY
Germany136 Posts
If the Zerg attacks the Protoss right when he leaves his base (yes it is mapdependent) and gets the deathball down to pure stalkers, rushing in for the kill it might be better to build muta/ling Also i assume you need spines buying some time at your base. I dont know, but i think u have armorupgraded your roach/Hy-army, so at least armor is covered(if you choose so). Together with the upgraded mutas (assuming you upgraded at least corrupters attack before) its maybe a better option to "surround" stalkers and give them way more targets then they can handle, while raining terror from above, than taking away the shields from every single stalker with roach/hydra while dying. I have to say i only know it from a gametype that is commonly seen as retarded bullshit and i am way to bad at this game to have experiences as Zerg noone might laugh about, but as far as i know stalkers have a very short time to laugh about a ocean of zerglings - prepare enough larvea plz^^ obviously the Zerg will most likely loose every mutalisk, but then the Protoss also has to rebuild his whole dead ball, while only mining from his 3rd. I dont root for Protoss nor Zerg, i really try to figure it out - so please be patient with me O_o mfg NM3 | ||
|
ReaperX
Hong Kong1758 Posts
| ||
|
sereniity
Sweden1159 Posts
On April 20 2011 00:12 SweetenemY wrote: As i said: i am not a good player. So i dont dare saying Zergplayers are stupid, i just want to understand, why they dont use their ability to switch their unit-composition/tech within seconds, in order to break a protoss army, that is lacking some kind of tech (templar), or lacking (enough) unit-producing structures to react accordingly in time(3+ stargates/robos). Why dont they kill mainly the collosi in the first engagement and then, when the Protoss reinforces only stalker to go funking kill the Zerg, switch their army-composition, that is able to kill the stalker ball. No offense anywhere, just the same i have written before, so thanks for grabbing a line of my post, just to blame me have the wrong tone ... People already do that, in theory you'd want to kill the colossus and then remax in Hydralisks to kill this whole stalker ball, the problem is that if he gets one or two colossus out before you can go and kill that stalker ball, you're fucked, it's just soo fragile.... I believe that the future of zerg is somewhere in Spanishiwas playstyle, alot of nyduses, queens and ling/bling with drops. | ||
|
TheResidentEvil
United States991 Posts
| ||
|
Jayrod
1820 Posts
On April 19 2011 21:24 partysnatcher wrote: I realize this is a stupid thing to do when I posted a very reasonable, objective "you don't have to nerf P and T to fix Zerg"-post on page 10, but I feel like saying this - so here I go: 1) Zerg is more difficult to just play "normally" - this is a fact, and few people will deny this. 2) When SC2 was refined to require less APM, a lot of fast, skilled players looked towards Z because they thought they would get more out of their fast fingers with Zerg. 3) Most people I know that were high level in other games, now play Zerg. Ie - better, higher quality RTS players have picked Zerg. 4) It is a common experience for Zergs on ladder to play harder, sneakier and more tactical than their opponents, and lose to simple, mindless, cookie-cutter builds by P and T. 5) Most intelligent commentators and people with insight in SC2, are Zerg players. We have some awesome Ts and Ps out there, by all means, but most Zergs are playing on "very hard"-mode. Zergs have tried to master the game on "very hard" mode for almost a year now, and are of course in the face of repeated defeat, much better trained than most Ts and Ps. Based on player skill alone, Zerg should be the dominating race as it was in the early / mid beta. The zerg players i face at masters level are far less refined in general than even my terran opponents. Zerg had a long comfort zone where their key to winning with a decent rate was just macroing up and getting bases. They are not complete players at this point and very few seem to understand the importance of timing. Additionally, most of the best and fastest players actually picked terran at the onset of sc2. Your facts are as wrong as your opinion is stupid | ||
|
Raid
United States398 Posts
People need to stop blaming races and start blaming themselves for losing. If they don't like their race on how it is now they should gain more perspective on how its like for the other race by offracing a few games and looking for wholes in the other race's perspective.. | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On April 19 2011 23:10 Benjerry wrote: The reasonable way of reading what you quoted is of course to take it to imply that *both* players make no mistakes. Because then it makes perfect sense, and is congruent with the overall point made in the post. But it´s easier to assume the silly interpretation (I.e. "100% perfect Protoss vs. Flawed Zerg") while calling the post "stupid", I guess... Which is of course an impossible scenario. You can't both play perfectly. To play perfectly is to make every decision the best possible decision, and to control every single unit in the best possible way for the best possible results, as well as never queue, spend all your money, etc. Only, that's not even theoretically possible for both players, because decision making is responsive. Your decisions are influenced by what your opponent has done, and vice versa. Somewhere, someone is going to make a decision that will have a negative impact on their side of the field, and that means they could have made a better decision, thus not perfect. | ||
|
Penecks
United States600 Posts
On April 20 2011 01:54 TheResidentEvil wrote: protoss use their strongest units and zerg dont. Pretty easy to see how this got one sided. I mean people complain about the Void Ray/ Colo and its the Toss STRONGEST units. Really? Cause I haven't seen a deathball containing carriers/mothership/hts in a while... though even a few HTs integrated into the standard collosus deathball will absolutely demolish a high food Z army in seconds. And lol at the people saying remax with a "counter" to the P army, when you can barely remax with your basic roach/hydra in time (and on most maps, the deathball can camp between some of your expos and your units never get together and are slaughtered so you lose instantly). It is the equivalent of being given a task to create an endgame zerg army in the time it takes the P to waltz over and start destroying your bases: those units take too long to build, morph, and cost too much for this to be effective. | ||
| ||
|
|
|
EPT
